[<prev] [next>] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-Id: <1455159578-17256-1-git-send-email-byungchul.park@lge.com>
Date: Thu, 11 Feb 2016 11:59:38 +0900
From: Byungchul Park <byungchul.park@....com>
To: peterz@...radead.org, mingo@...nel.org
Cc: linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: [PATCH] sched: remove an unnecessary memory access, rq->cpu in __schedule()
Is there any reason keeping this statement on the code?
-----8<-----
>From d8a387efb8199b69b6464970d6f9fc57cbcf0ab0 Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001
From: Byungchul Park <byungchul.park@....com>
Date: Thu, 11 Feb 2016 11:50:53 +0900
Subject: [PATCH] sched: remove an unnecessary memory access, rq->cpu in
__schedule()
Remove an unnecessary assignment of variable not used any more.
Signed-off-by: Byungchul Park <byungchul.park@....com>
---
kernel/sched/core.c | 1 -
1 file changed, 1 deletion(-)
diff --git a/kernel/sched/core.c b/kernel/sched/core.c
index 1315cec..501f5d9 100644
--- a/kernel/sched/core.c
+++ b/kernel/sched/core.c
@@ -3193,7 +3193,6 @@ static void __sched notrace __schedule(bool preempt)
trace_sched_switch(preempt, prev, next);
rq = context_switch(rq, prev, next); /* unlocks the rq */
- cpu = cpu_of(rq);
} else {
lockdep_unpin_lock(&rq->lock);
raw_spin_unlock_irq(&rq->lock);
--
1.9.1
Powered by blists - more mailing lists